Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE  (Read 2334827 times)

antijon

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 230
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1620 on: October 01, 2014, 05:07:21 PM »
Hey Hanon, thanks for letting me know about the gif. This is it in a zip, but please note: This only shows the action of the driving circuit. If there was a load attached, the center coil would produce an opposing field each time a driving coil increased. Thanks for the formula and diagram. It's funny that I can understand just about any machine by looking at it, but I have a serious mental block with math. haha

Hey guys, in doing some tests with my 2-phase setup, I'm starting to see some strange things happening. And I think I see why the Figuera generator can produce more power than is consumed. If anyone is familiar with motor back-emf, please correct me if I'm wrong, but feeding a device like this 2-phase power, even with Figuera's 2-phase DC, creates a back voltage that reduces the incoming current. After all, the driving circuit can create a rotating field, just as Figuera described.

If anyone wants to try this, you can use two transformers instead of a dual-primary transformer. If you look at my 2-phase circuit, simply connect two transformers in series, then attach one side to the capacitor, the opposite transformer to the resistor, and then connect the two center transformer leads to the other AC input. Connect the two outputs in series, and to the load.

Interesting things that I've noticed: Loading the output increases the voltage on the supply side. I don't have any power meters, but this suggests that the current input is reduced, similar to a motor back-emf.

antijon

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 230
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1621 on: October 01, 2014, 07:14:36 PM »
Guys, this is an improvement to my last schematic. The two transformers can be shorted.

If we compare this schematic to a "permanent split capacitor" motor:
The transformer connected to the capacitor represents the "start" winding.
The transformer connected to line through the resistor represents the "run" winding.
The two transformer secondaries represent the rotor.

When the two secondary coils are wired in series, and shorted, this is like the motor running with no load. It creates a back-emf that cancels the incoming line voltage, and reduces current drawn from the line.


But still, I want to point out that the locked- rotor amps, or LRA, represents the current consumed by a motor when the rotor can't turn. This is normally near or more than 100 amps, in my line of work. This means that the motor is behaving exactly like a transformer with a shorted secondary. There is no back-emf being created, and all the current is being taken from line... which is exactly like what we do when we power a simple transformer from line. Think about it like this: motors actually do produce overunity. I say that because the electrical energy in the rotor never changes. So, we have a transformer with a shorted secondary that pulls 100 amps from the line, but by spinning the secondary, we can generate our own energy and reduce the line current to a mere 1/10 of what it was. So, a typical transformer with a shorted secondary that once drew 100 amps, now only draws 10, yet the energy in the rotor remains the same. However, we never realized this because we've never tapped the rotor current of an induction motor.

Anyway, this is all theoretical, but if someone has accurate power reading tools, and want's to try this simple circuit, I'd really appreciate any info. Thanks guys


bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1622 on: October 02, 2014, 01:52:32 AM »
A colleague of mine was very impressed when he learned about the absence of a governor mechanisms in the Ferranti’s disk armature alternators. He did not believe it and he proposed that it might be due to the inertia of the large diameter armature. I discussed this possibility and explained that the ironless coils make the armature less massive. I also indicated that if the armature coils were filled with iron, it will be heavier with greater momentum but the augmented reaction field will create a counter force thousands of times larger (as explained in the published paper) and without a governor, it will just bring the armature to a stop.
 
I then decided to search the historical records for any information related to the inertia of the armature disk of the Ferranti copper disk alternators.  Certainly, I found a lecture in THE ELECTRICAL ENGINEER, OCTOBER 14, 1982 from Professor George Forbes in which he explains the reasons why some alternating-current dynamos can function as motors very efficiently. In the first column on page 385, Mr. Forbes wrote:
 
“The only difference between the Siemens or Ferranti alternator and the Mordey alternator is that, in the one case, the armature revolves, and in the other case the field magnets revolve; otherwise they are practically identical, from an electrical point of view. Yet the Mordey alternator acts most admirably as a motor, and the Siemens or Ferranti machine does not work as a motor. The reason is simply this, that the power which is being given to an alternating motor is of course of a pulsating character, like the current; and there are moments when no power is given to the motor at all. If, then, the motor is doing work, it requires to have a considerable momentum to get over those dead centres, and to be able to continue doing the work, and to get pass those dead centres when the generator is given out no power whatever. Now, the Mordey alternator, in which the field magnets rotate, has an enormous momentum; but the Siemens or Ferranti alternator, where the armature rotates, has very little momentum indeed; and the consequence is that while the Mordey alternator works admirably as a motor, the Siemens or Ferranti alternator does not.”
 
The above description makes it clear that the absence of a governor system in the Ferranti alternators is not due to the mass or inertia of the rotating armature. To me it is clear that the armature coils kept turning without any effort because of a very low counter torque even under considerable load current conditions. It is also an irony that there were order of magnitude more efficient generators being marketed and used in the newborn electrical system more than 120 years ago.
 
Bajac
« Last Edit: October 02, 2014, 01:42:10 PM by bajac »

jdavidcv

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1623 on: October 02, 2014, 03:43:07 PM »
Ferranti useful information.


JD





Cadman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 409
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1624 on: October 02, 2014, 04:50:14 PM »
... The above description makes it clear that the absence of a governor system in the Ferranti alternators is not due to the mass or inertia of the rotating armature. To me it is clear that the armature coils kept turning without any effort because of a very low counter torque even under considerable load current conditions. It is also an irony that there were order of magnitude more efficient generators being marketed and used in the newborn electrical system more than 120 years ago.

This may have a bearing on the subject, or may not.

The Ferranti coils are wound like capacitors and there is evidence that they had a more than average effect in his alternators. Ever hear of the Ferranti Effect? It's a phenomenon that became apparent after his alternators were installed at Deptford.

Also, alternators with windings that have capacitance can produce a motor effect. And we all know about the Tesla coil for electromagnets that demonstrate the affect capacitance has on coil windings.

Info on the motor effect can be found on pages 33-35 of the seventh edition of  Dynamo-electric machinery. Here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=p4TTAAAAMAAJ&pg=PR10-IA1&lpg=PR10-IA1&dq=%22Dynamo-electric+Machinery%22+Seventh+Edition&source=bl&ots=k5uEpzPlNH&sig=UNAvJT-5lWhdFE_uKtY2sCaUHlo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=4lotVI3jC8T9yQS94YCIBQ&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=%22Dynamo-electric%20Machinery%22%20Seventh%20Edition&f=false

Cadman



bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1625 on: October 02, 2014, 06:17:24 PM »
Cadman,
 
I don't think I understand your comment completely.
 
But, the Ferranti effect shown in transmission lines has nothing to do with the performance of the generator. When I took the power transmission line course, it was modeled in three types: short, medium, and long. Long transmission line being the most complex. Basically, as the feeders get longer, the capacity effects of the line becomes more pronounced, which can cause reflection and standing wave issues. The result is higher voltages at the receiving end of the transmission lines. To stabilize the voltage, shunt devices are placed at specific locations of the transmission line.
 
I assume that Ferranti was the first person to experience this event in power transmission lines because he was the first to install relative long feeders at high voltages. I think he installed a 10KV line while most of the engineers of the time forecasted a failure because these engineers believed that it was about impossible to go over 2KV and trasmit the high power capacity of the Ferranti generators. I remember reading something about it.
 
Bajac
 
 

bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1626 on: October 02, 2014, 06:42:09 PM »
Something I have been trying to find is the reason(s) why the Ferranti type generators were abandoned. Maybe someone in this forum has come across with this info.

forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4076
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1627 on: October 02, 2014, 08:02:50 PM »
bajac

Afaik it was simply due to ECONOMIC reasons !!!!  American electrical engineers were able to standarise production, lower costs and so won by price advantage !

http://books.google.pl/books?id=rudRAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA64&lpg=PA64&dq=ferranti+generator&source=bl&ots=glQKAnSmWk&sig=9CD11HcQNFrP5G9m-QMpTcjE4ws&hl=pl&sa=X&ei=hIQtVLCzHqrmyQPmsICoDQ&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=ferranti%20generator&f=false

Cadman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 409
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1628 on: October 02, 2014, 09:07:37 PM »
Cadman,
 
I don't think I understand your comment completely.

OK, but if you ever build one of these just give some thought about my last post. The Ferranti effect was the least of it. The point was to built-in capacitance and how it might be used to advantage.

Cheers

bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1629 on: October 03, 2014, 12:24:03 AM »
bajac

Afaik it was simply due to ECONOMIC reasons !!!!  American electrical engineers were able to standarise production, lower costs and so won by price advantage !

http://books.google.pl/books?id=rudRAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA64&lpg=PA64&dq=ferranti+generator&source=bl&ots=glQKAnSmWk&sig=9CD11HcQNFrP5G9m-QMpTcjE4ws&hl=pl&sa=X&ei=hIQtVLCzHqrmyQPmsICoDQ&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=ferranti%20generator&f=false


Could you provide the specific page numbers showing the information?

bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1630 on: October 03, 2014, 12:32:54 AM »
OK, but if you ever build one of these just give some thought about my last post. The Ferranti effect was the least of it. The point was to built-in capacitance and how it might be used to advantage.

Cheers


I still do not know what capacitance are you referring to and/or I do not see how said capacitance could help on the power performance of the generator. If your are proposing an idea or concept, please, take the time to develop and elaborate your idea. For example, it took me several weeks to prepare my concept for diminishing torque when using ironless induced coil in generators. It is not fair for others when a person proposes something that only he/she understands and then let others the work to figure it out. Otherwise, we will be killing the purpose and goal of the forum, which is to contribute and provide understanding.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2014, 02:35:41 AM by bajac »

bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1631 on: October 03, 2014, 03:00:06 AM »
Bajac,

Firstly, english is not my language and sorry for any miscommunication. This is my first post here :D

My intention here is to tell you Bajac that I think you're on the right track. I cannot agree more with you about the ironless core..
I hypothesized months ago when you were off of the forum that the only secret about Figuera generator is the coreless armature or output coil, but I had no time to prove it because I was completing my engineering degree. Now I am graduated and have a lot of free time (and still jobless lol)..
I have built an extremely simple device the components of which I believe all of you guys already have them. If my measurement with a cheap multimeter is sufficiently accurate, then I can say that the hypothesis is valid. Before building it, I simulated the device in FEMM 4.2 and the result of my experiment agreed with the simulation.

I am sure that I don't fully understand it, but this is the concept I use to describe the mechanism:
We have to refresh our old lesson
-------------
Properties    Electric          Magnetic
Force            V (volt)            NI (ampere turn)
Flow             I (ampere)    Flux (weber)
Impedance   Z (ohm)        S (AT/wb)
-------------
Flux linking: V = d(flux)/dt ----> I tried to replicate 1908 patent so no flux cutting
-------------
A coil with a higher permeability core means that with the same magneto motive force/MMF (and with relatively the same power if hysteresis and eddy losses kept minimum) more flux will be created (more flow). Doesn't it sound that we get "free flux"? This is what contributes to overunity when it is coupled with an output coil with low permeability core or coreless.
In a conventional transformer while operating, both the primary coil and the secondary one have the same MMF, more turns less current, less turns more current. Since they are wound in the same core material and in a closed magnetic circuit, they will also have the same amount of flux. In other words, the primary is "armed" with high permeability core to induce a voltage in the secondary and unfortunately the secondary is also "armed" so that it can fight back. The counter attack from the secondary will reduce the self inductance of the primary (lower inductance L), therefore more current will flow in the primary which means more power dissipated to heat. That event is (in my opinion) mistakenly explained that the power of the secondary is coming from the primary.

Back to Figuera's generator 1908. It very similarly appears like a transformer. But here, we "arm" only the primary with a high permeability core and we keep the secondary "unarmed". With that arrangement, the primary is still able to induce a voltage in the secondary (although lower because of high reluctance and less flux) and the secondary with its induced voltage cannot fight back the flux applied to it, it needs a lot of current to fight the primary flux back. Therefore, the self inductance of the primary will be relatively constant and no more power will be drawn and we can say that the only factor which limits the output power is the resistance and strength of the conductor to carry the current. Less resistance will help to release more power.

Here are some results of my experiment (all in rms):
Vin = 220 V 50 hz (sinusoidal from line)
R primary coil = 6 ohms
D primary = ??
R secondary coil = 0.2 ohms
D secondary = 0.8 mm

Open-secondary:
Vout = 5 V
Iin = 1.52 A (magnetizing current)

Closed:
(I)
R secondary coil + load = 1.2 ohms (I used connector wire as a load lol)
Iout = 3.8 A
Iin = 1.53 A (insignificant increase)
(II)
R secondary coil + load = 0.6 ohms (more connector wire)
Iout = 7.9 A
Iin = 1.54 A (still insignificant increase)

I did the Closed I & II test no more than 10 s because the connector wire got really hot. You can calculate the COP by yourselves. I plan to do a self loop test but many things need to be calculated. I'll get a job first lol.


Good luck


You are welcome and thank you for sharing your work in this forum. We will wait for some video or pictures showing your set up.


You should exercise extreme caution when using any application software to simulate these devices. Recall that the algorithm of these software are based on the mathematical models outlined in the engineering books, the same books that outlaw the existence of these devices.

Thanks again and hope to hear from you soon.


Bajac

forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4076
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1632 on: October 03, 2014, 11:08:39 AM »

Could you provide the specific page numbers showing the information?
Yes, sorry. It is on page 66.
This page is also very informative : http://www.electric-history.com/~zero/005-electricity.htm

bajac

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1633 on: October 03, 2014, 01:47:30 PM »
Yes, sorry. It is on page 66.
This page is also very informative : http://www.electric-history.com/~zero/005-electricity.htm

No progress. Page 66 is missing. Could you summarize it?
 
I have a hunch. Before the electrical system was established there existed the big energy companies that provided fuel for the gas lamps, boilers for heating and steam engines, etc. I suspect that these companies bought most of the shares of the earlier electrical companies such as Ferranti, Mordey, Siemens, etc. and set the rules for what technology was supposed to move forward. A key investigation would be to identify all share holders of the earlier electrical companies and identify any conflict of interest of these people. The interest or benefit is the greatest motivator.

poorpluto

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
Re: Re-Inventing The Wheel-Part1-Clemente_Figuera-THE INFINITE ENERGY MACHINE
« Reply #1634 on: October 03, 2014, 03:05:39 PM »

You are welcome and thank you for sharing your work in this forum. We will wait for some video or pictures showing your set up.


You should exercise extreme caution when using any application software to simulate these devices. Recall that the algorithm of these software are based on the mathematical models outlined in the engineering books, the same books that outlaw the existence of these devices.

Thanks again and hope to hear from you soon.


Bajac

I was aware that the software wouldn't calculate an overunity condition, I just wanted to estimate how much flux generated and the experiment result is the ultimate truth although the explanation is very often unknown.

Below I attach a picture showing my set up which is very simple to replicate. The dimension is 8x9x10 cm and between 3-4 kg's weight. I hope somebody here would replicate and then do a more accurate COP measurement, better yet make a self-running set up which will show obviously its overunity.

I did some more tests today and got slightly different results. Here are some of them:

SECONDARY OPEN (all in rms):
Vin : 220 V 50Hz from the line
Iin : 1.52
Vout : 5.3 V
SECONDARY SHORTED:
Iin : 1.6 A        Rin : 6.3 ohm        Real power resistive only, excluding hysteresis & eddy current, Pin= I^2*R = 16.1 W
Iout : 9 A      Rout : 0.5 ohm     Real power out, Pout = I^2*R = 40 W

My set up is very loose and vibrating violently so I guess that's why the result differed from what I posted here http://www.overunity.com/12794/re-inventing-the-wheel-part1-clemente_figuera-the-infinite-energy-machine/msg418871/#msg418871 ..
If the reactance of the primary inductance is neutralized by using capacitor, Vin will need only around 11 Vac rms (for consideration when designing self-running set up)..

Good luck